i have been former law enforcement and i should bring to the attention of the people at some time ago, the supreme court made a decision that said the police do not have a duty to protect the individual citizen, only society at large. what does that mean to you? people need to realize that the police are mostly reactionary when it comes to a crime or when you need to call them. a lot of times, while they are waiting for them to get there, the crime has occurred and the perpetrators have left. i carry concealed and i have been doing it for some years. i know that if i was in a situation where there was somebody going nuts with a gun and killing people, i would not have to think about reacting to that situation. people need to realize when they pass all of these laws, it is just the camel's nose under the

tent. people make a mistake when they think this is going to go smoothly and people are going to give up their rights easily. just food for thought. it is a right and it should not be infringed upon. it's a right and have a great day. >> on tuesday see, calling from omaha, neb.. >> i was just thinking about this. i don't want to take anyone's guns away, but i want people to realize that it started 50 or 60 years ago with politicizing and propagandizing from the nra. it goes back to money. makes me so mad they use their amendment to say look at our cause. when the president talked after that incident, he said the best resolution is to put guns in all schools. it was just furthering his cause to get money. it is for a well formed

militias. at the time when this amendment was written, we had muskets. we did not have bullets that could shoot 100 bullets in the second and put it in perspective -- and not saying take away guns. is as relevantry to them as to why they have a gun, but sometimes, because of the politicization of it, we can't even have a discussion. i want people to understand everybody's view is coming from a place to help. not to take away guns. there is the extreme left in the extreme right, but the nra has taken away our chance to have a meaningful discussion in this country. >> thank you. we want to bring up what the national rifle association's president said on cnn. he said he is already rejecting the white house outline of gun- control recommendations, specifically any ban on assault

weapons or high-capacity magazines. he says that is a nonstarter. >> i would say the likelihood is they are not going to be able to get an assault weapons ban. >> how about a clip? >> i don't think ultimately they will get that either because i don't think you can make a case that you can regulate it because these things cost virtually nothing. even david gregory could find one. we live in a society where we have constitutional rights. secondly, there are millions upon millions of americans who value the rights they have under the second amendment and they are involved in shooting sports or use firearms for self-defense and we think they are going to be hurt. >> that is the president of the nra. we want to see what you think about that issue. our next caller is jennifer from

riley, kansas. >> i just want to say that freedom is our right and the government has been taking away all our rights. somebody said earlier, teachers and carrying tasters. i think that is a great idea. legal guns are here and more legal guns there are, the better chance we have to protect ourselves. at least like a team of teachers at all carry guns at the school so that we don't have to make extra budget for it or anything. i think it should be allowed to have guns. we also need to give gun safety. we give training class is to children starting very young.

they are dangerous unless they are used properly. >> my thoughts at is it is the mental health. for good about the nra and the guns and all that, they are not going to vote that out. it is too much money. we should ask that an ira for help with money toward mental health. that would help solve the problem, but the guns -- i carry a gun, i am licensed. i had to qualify for the gun in my state. don't come to my house and tried to take my guns because you are not going to get it. >> what do you think about the

gun issue? >> it -- gun ownership is not the problem, gun responsibility is the problem. he got a hold of his mother's dance, says she did very little to protect those guns from her son. these people who are buying guns, every gun purchase now a day comes with a lot. a lot of people are not using these locks. children are getting a hold of these guns in their houses. they're shooting themselves and shooting their friends. you have children get a hold of their parents' guns and shooting vast numbers of teacher -- mass numbers of people. if i loan somebody my automobile and they run someone down, i am responsible. i think the parents should be held just as responsible and maybe they should be facing criminal charges, but i don't

hear anything about that all. it's always focused on again user and not the gun owner. if you start holding these people responsible, we would have a whole different conversation. >> how you pronounce the name of your city? >> i was a business owner in california in 1995. i had three people pull into my business, one of them was armed and held me at gunpoint and still over $50,000 worth of tools and equipment. 25 calls to 911 later, the police never showed up. they never came, never took a report. the person who robbed me did not have a gun. they were able to run free and take all my stuff and they knew i could not fight back.

i knew the perpetrator was in the police wouldn't even take a report and go get my stuff back. that is why i became a gun owner. i could have stopped them from robbing me if i really wanted to. maybe the situation would have been different because the point -- person pointing a gun at me turn away several times. >> thank you for sharing your experience. we're going to take one more call now from los, california. >> a couple of items i would like to mention here in california. for many years, while i was under psychiatric care, i carry a firearm. i could legally purchase a firearm because i had never been committed to a facility by a court of law. even though i was under psychiatric care by my own choosing, i was still allowed to

purchase a firearm. i think they should change as lost. second item -- due to crimes that had nothing to do with firearms, i am now a convicted felon. while i cannot legally purchase a weapon on the state of california or many other states, i can go down to a few places here in town and other areas i know of and pick up a weapon any time of night or day and it's not going to change the fact that a convicted felon has access to a weapon. if someone wants to commit a crime with a firearm, the law says they are written are not going to stop them. >> we're going to leave it there. the conversation continues on our facebook page. we will be taking viewer calls

and comments tomorrow morning on "washington journal." tomorrow, at 9:00, a johns hopkins host safe form on the gun laws from a public health perspective. you can watch that on seized at2 -- you can't watch that on the c-span2. live coverage of that meeting on c-span2. >> this week, president obama made a number of nominations to his cabinet, including the current white house chief of staff, jack lew, to head up the treasury department.

>> ladies and gentlemen, the president of the united states, accompanied by secretary timothy geiger and mr. jacob lew. >> good afternoon, everybody. please have a seat. a little more than four years ago, i stood with mr. tim geithner and denounced him as my first nominee to my cabinet. we were barely two months into the financial crisis. the stock market had greater and the housing market had cratered as well. bank after bank was on the verge of collapse. worst of all, more than 800,000 americans would lose their jobs in just that month. and the bottom was not yet in sight. i could not blamed him when he tried to tell me he was not the right guy for the job. [applause] but i knew that his extensive experience with economic policy

made him qualified. i knew he could hit the ground running. he had just spent several sleepless and chaotic weeks emerged in the crisis and had been working closely with his republican predecessor to save the financial sector. then with the wreckage of our economy still smoldering and unstable, i asked him to help me put it back together. thanks in large part to his steady hand, our economy has been growing, our businesses have created nearly 6 million new jobs, the money we spend to save the financial system has largely been paid back. we put in place rules to prevent that kind of meltdown from ever happening again. the auto industry was saved. we major taxpayers are not on the hook if the biggest firms fail again.

we have taken steps to help underwater homeowners come up for air and open new markets to sell american goods overseas. we have begun to reduce our deficit through a balanced mix of spending cuts and reforms to a tax code that at the time when we both came in was skewed in favor of the wealthy at the expense of middle class americans. when the history books are written, tim geithner is going to go down as one of our finest secretaries of the treasury. [applause]

don't embarrass him. [laughter] on a personal note, he has been a wonderful friend and dependable advisor the out these last four years. there is an unofficial thing at treasury -- no peacocks commager, no winners. that would be a good saying for all of washington. few embody that ideal better than tim geithner. that is why when he was thinking about leaving a couple of years ago, i had to personally get on my knees with carol to help convince him to stay on a little bit longer. i could not be more grateful to carol and the entire family for letting him make